Jump to content
artthouwill

New Eldorados?

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Busjack said:

That's a surprise, as the time for exercising optons on the 2011 contract expired, although the number  of options didn't, and the 2017 budget had  a line item for 35 and 40 foot buses. If they are 40 foot buses, undoubtedly West (as NW, SW, and S are covered, and  W has the  biggest mess).

Again, I quit betting on  fleet numbers.

Wow!  That's a really big surprise.  It looks like Pace is all in on El Dorado.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, rotjohns said:

Wow!  That's a really big surprise.  It looks like Pace is all in on El Dorado.  

However, as often pointed out, Pace isn't going to Matteson Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge, Ram and Eldorado and picking up 75 buses, they have to be bid out. As I inferred above, while I thought the 2011 contract had run out, these must still be under it, as there has not been an advertised procurement this year. Also, as was pointed out in the Board Video when the advertised contract for the trolleys was approved, Eldorado was the sole bidder because some other company wouldn't bid due to Pace deadlines and specifications, such as cameras. Gillig has a 30' trolley product, so I guess it was them.

Raising a bit of speculation, if the last deliveries ended at 6575, Pace intends to get more than 24 buses, or otherwise it wouldn't overlap the 6600s. Either it has already filled that hole, or started a new 6700 series to avoid overlapping the 6600s. That's why I doubted that this delivery is just to replace a couple of Orions at NW, although that might be an effect.

Even though paratransits are purchased through dealers, it would be a big surprise if the small buses showed up on the feeder routes without a advertised procurement, as one is required even for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why 15500s and 17500s weren't 6700s or higher. I'm just not a fan of 5 digits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, garmon757 said:

I don't understand why 15500s and 17500s weren't 6700s or higher. I'm just not a fan of 5 digits. 

It's a little more understandable why they are, if one takes into account the 111xx hybrid paratransits and 14xxx and 16xxx paratransits and community vehicles as indicating the in service date in the first two digits, which other transit authorities do.

But if Pace were being consistent, the 6700s @Pace831 saw, should have been something like 17600s and the trolleys should have been something like 17800s. But they weren't, and unless the 8624s refer to the Joliet trolley I mentioned, I have no idea why Pace went in that direction. Maybe Pace has too much trouble juggling the paratransits, community vehicles, vans, and 30', 35', 40' and MCI buses.

And for somewhat confusing Montreal numbers using a similar system (but with a dash), see the discussion about here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busjack said:

It's a little more understandable why they are, if one takes into account the 111xx hybrid paratransits and 14xxx and 16xxx paratransits and community vehicles as indicating the in service date in the first two digits, which other transit authorities do.

But if Pace were being consistent, the 6700s @Pace831 saw, should have been something like 17600s and the trolleys should have been something like 17800s. But they weren't, and unless the 8624s refer to the Joliet trolley I mentioned, I have no idea why Pace went in that direction. Maybe Pace has too much trouble juggling the paratransits, community vehicles, vans, and 30', 35', 40' and MCI buses.

And for somewhat confusing Montreal numbers using a similar system (but with a dash), see the discussion about here.

 

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garmon757 said:

I don't understand why 15500s and 17500s weren't 6700s or higher. I'm just not a fan of 5 digits. 

I'm not a fan of  5 digit fleet numbers  either but a lot of companies are going  that route.  Fora lot of fleets, the digits are the last five digits of the VIN.   Others use the first two numbers  to denote the model year, which explains the 15500s (2015)and the 17500s [2017).  I guess the latter method makes for easy identification. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

I'm not a fan of  5 digit fleet numbers  either but a lot of companies are going  that route.  Fora lot of fleets, the digits are the last five digits of the VIN.   Others use the first two numbers  to denote the model year, which explains the 15500s (2015)and the 17500s [2017).  I guess the latter method makes for easy identification. 

Well that makes a ton of sense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, garmon757 said:

Well that makes a ton of sense!

What didn't make sense was to number  the 2003 NABI 35ft buses 6600s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

What didn't make sense was to number  the 2003 NABI 35ft buses 6600s.

I thought they did that to allow room in the numbering in case all the options for 40' NABIs were exercised. Is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

What didn't make sense was to number  the 2003 NABI 35ft buses 6600s.

2005 NABIs 6262-6322 might played a factor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, garmon757 said:

2005 NABIs 6262-6322 might played a factor. 

I doubt that (since Pace usually doesn't think that far ahead). More than likely it was that just running series in a row, there was always an oddball, such as 2378 being a 35' bus following 40' buses  and 2453 being a 40' bus following 35' buses.

The other variation was that the ElDorado Transmarks were 2500s, but the 2401 series NABIs came afterward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pictures from Chandler Friday morning. There were a bunch of people walking around so I had to be super sneaky.

6711, 6712, 6714

17544, 17546, 17554, 17557, 17558, 17560

DSCF2402.thumb.JPG.5b8338b593da9242aa32d2f2fec93505.JPG

DSCF2403.thumb.JPG.1dd70834dc967c6c4c4fc86db486c2d1.JPG

DSCF2404.thumb.JPG.414394407dbcc27467d171b5b493fd9a.JPG

DSCF2406.thumb.JPG.9033d783ef51babead5e2846176a6436.JPG

DSCF2409.thumb.JPG.8b91c389b0f87fd44516bed650466c08.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, artthouwill said:

What didn't make sense was to number  the 2003 NABI 35ft buses 6600s.

17 hours ago, Pace831 said:

I thought they did that to allow room in the numbering in case all the options for 40' NABIs were exercised. Is that correct?

From what NABI had published, there were another 100 options (which would have gotten up to 6423), but it was numeric dyslexia, the options expired (as on the impending bankruptcy, NABI said it wasn't obligated on outstanding options, but theoretically 5 years from a 2002 award would have been 2007), or Pace wasn't interested (having moved on to the 2600s)?

The only thing that became apparent was that 6000s were 40 foot buses, 6600s were 35 foot buses, 6900s were motor coaches, and 2500s and 2600s were 30 foot or so buses. But, again, I don't know why Pace strung Orion VIs, NABIs, and Axesses together.

It's fairly obvious that the CNGs are in a separate series because they can only be used at a garage set up for them (now only S). But getting back to @Pace831's and @garmon757's point:

  • What planning was done when 6162 appeared way before 6156-6161 (which gets back to the mystery about those 6 Orions)?
  • if Pace were planning ahead, why didn't they start the Axess buses in a new series instead of now having to leapfrog the 6600s?

I'll throw out one other bit of speculation, based on some Orion Is lasting 20 some years until the first Axess buses showed up: Are the Orion VIs at NW hanging around until the Dempster Pulse buses show up?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Busjack said:

From what NABI had published, there were another 100 options (which would have gotten up to 6423), but it was numeric dyslexia, the options expired (as on the impending bankruptcy, NABI said it wasn't obligated on outstanding options, but theoretically 5 years from a 2002 award would have been 2007), or Pace wasn't interested (having moved on to the 2600s).

The only thing that became apparent was that 6000s were 40 foot buses, 6600s were 35 foot buses, 6900s were motor coaches, and 2500s and 2600s were 30 foot or so buses. But, again, I don't know why Pace strung Orion VIs, NABIs, and Axesses together.

It's fairly obvious that the CNGs are in a separate series because they can only be used at a garage set up for them (now only S). But getting back to your and @garmon757's point:

  • What planning was done when 6162 appeared way before 6156-6161 (which gets back to the mystery about those 6 Orions)?
  • if Pace were planning ahead, why didn't they start the Axess buses in a new series instead of now having to leapfrog the 6600s?

 

I guess the plan when the NABIs were ordered was, as you said, start a new 6600 series for 35' buses, and continue the 6000 series for 40' buses. Of course that turned out to be short sighted, but they wouldn't have known at the time how many 40' buses would be ordered in the future. Even at the time the Axess contract was awarded, they probably anticipated ordering less buses than they actually did. Of course now we have the 6700s. Rather than finish 6576-99 and skip to 6685 or 6700, they probably prefer to keep this latest order in their own series, indicating they are different from the 6600s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

Even at the time the Axess contract was awarded, they probably anticipated ordering less buses than they actually did.

Hard to tell, as the contract was for between 9 and 406, and the only thing that affected it was that the CNGs were on a separate contract. One thing that indicates doubt the other way was that in year 2, Pace only ordered 8 buses (6392-6399), presumably just enough to cover dead Orion VIs.

24 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

Rather than finish 6576-99 and skip to 6685 or 6700, they probably prefer to keep this latest order in their own series, indicating they are different from the 6600s.

I was running through my head (as indicated by my prior posts) that it might depend on what you saw and when you saw it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I was running through my head (as indicated by my prior posts) that it might depend on what you saw and when you saw it.

I'm willing to bet that 6576-99 don't exist. 6711, at least, is a 40' bus, not a 35' (zoom in on my 3rd picture above and count the windows).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Busjack said:

I doubt that (since Pace usually doesn't think that far ahead). More than likely it was that just running series in a row, there was always an oddball, such as 2378 being a 35' bus following 40' buses  and 2453 being a 40' bus following 35' buses.

The other variation was that the ElDorado Transmarks were 2500s, but the 2401 series NABIs came afterward.

Wait what??? #2378 was a 35-footer??? How can that be???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, garmon757 said:

Wait what??? #2378 was a 35-footer??? How can that be???

I made the  contrary  assumption on the  Yahoo group when I said Elgin had  a 40 foot bus and was set straight. Essentially, it was the same as 2272-2291. Since the newspapers at the time said Pace  was getting 106 buses,  it couĺd not have been unplanned. Likewise, it was said that Pace was getting 52 NABIs in 1999, so 2453 couldn't have been unplanned, either. As usual,, I'm  assuming no 13..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pace831 said:

I'm willing to bet that 6576-99 don't exist. 6711, at least, is a 40' bus, not a 35' (zoom in on my 3rd picture above and count the windows).

Don't know  why Pace would skip these numbers but start a series with numbers like 6162 and 6323.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I made the  contrary  assumption on the  Yahoo group when I said Elgin had  a 40 foot bus and was set straight. Essentially, it was the same as 2272-2291. Since the newspapers at the time said Pace  was getting 106 buses,  it couĺd not have been unplanned. Likewise, it was said that Pace was getting 52 NABIs in 1999, so 2453 couldn't have been unplanned, either. As usual,, I'm  assuming no 13..

CPTDB says 2378 was a replacement for 8800, which was destroyed in a fire. Since you say it "could not have been unplanned", are you rejecting that explanation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Don't know  why Pace would skip these numbers but start a series with numbers like 6162 and 6323.

The difference is that starting the latest series with 6576 would overlap with 6600s, whereas the 6162s and 6323s were just continuing where they left off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×